Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Aparna Saha vs C.E.S.C. Ltd. & Ors on 11 February, 2020
Author: Shekhar B. Saraf
Bench: Shekhar B. Saraf
1
11.02.2020
ss W.P.24087(W) of 2019
Aparna Saha
Vs.
C.E.S.C. Ltd. & ors.
Mr. Rabilal Maitra
Mr. Jyotirmoy Adhikari
Mr. Ambar Nath Banerji
Mr. Tirthankar Mukherjee ... for the petitioner
Mr. Protik Bandhu Banerjee
Mr. Tapas Ballav Mondal ... for the C.E.S.C. Ltd.
Mr. Aammar Zaki ... for the respondent no.9
Mr. D. N. Mukherjee Mr. Janardan Mondal ... for the State Mr. Reetobroto Kr. Mitra Mr. Pradip Sarawagi < ... for the appellant
1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India wherein the writ petitioner is aggrieved by inaction on the part of the C.E.S.C. authorities in providing the new electricity connection to the premises of the petitioner.
2. The factual matrix herein is that the private respondents being respondent nos.8 to 11 are opposing the installation of the new electricity connection at the premises of the petitioner.
3. According to the private respondents, the path that has been chosen by the C.E.S.C. Ltd. for effecting supply of electricity is over the property owned by the private respondents.
2
4. This matter was heard by me on several occasions and two reports have been filed by the C.E.S.C. Ltd. as per direction of this Court. The first report dated January 27, 2020 specifically states that the passage that is proposed to be used for granting electricity connection is a passage that is used for laying cables and streetlights are present on the said passage. The report further clarifies that such passage is used for egress and ingress of the petitioner and other neighbouring residents. Relevant portion of the report is delineated below :
" The respondents or the representatives of the respondents were also present during the said inspection but they refused to put their signatures to indicate their presence officially for unknown reasons. From the plain reading of the Writ Petition and also as unveiled from the locale that dispute with regard to right, title of the passage amongst the adjacent occupiers is the cause of action for which the captioned Writ Petition was filed. For the purpose of providing supplies to the occupiers of the adjacent premises the said passage was found to have been utilised for laying cables. I found that Kolkata Municipal Corporation's streetlight poles at the said passage. A sketch map is annexed with this report showing the existing supplies provided through the said passage in green lines and the proposed supply in red line.
The undersigned has been informed by the Senior Engineer who was present that the passage as identified is the only technically suitable passage for providing supply to the petitioner as an occupier of the premises. As an occupier of the premises the petitioner is entitled to get supply in her name. The petitioner is using the said passage for ingress and egress as well alike others."
5. Upon receipt of the above report, this Court further directed the C.E.S.C. authorities to examine whether there is any alternative route as had been suggested by the private respondents. The report dated February 11, 2020 has been placed before me that clearly indicates that the alternative passage cannot 3 be used for the purpose of granting of electricity connection to the petitioner due to several reasons as are indicated below :
"1) The approx. length of the alternative route as indicated by the added Respondent is 260 meters for laying cable in order to provide supply to the petitioner.
2) The alternative route approaching to the petitioner's premises was found too narrow for excavation and maintenance work of cable if laid thereat.
Moreover Drain pit and sewerage line are found passing along the said alternative passage.
3) It has been gathered from the local people that a massive fire incident took place in the distribution cable as laid through the alternative route in the year 2012 when K.K. Rubber Factory was getting supply from this distribution cable. Thereafter cable route was changed through the passage as offered earlier in favour of the petitioner.
4) The alternative route is very narrow through which water/foam tender vehicle of fire brigade will not be able to enter in case of emergency. In view of the foregoing, the undersigned submits most respectfully that the alternative route as insisted by the added respondent appears to be not technically feasible. The route as indicated in the report of Ld. Advocate on behalf of the Licensee Company is technically feasible for providing supply in favour of the Petitioner."
6. In light of the report filed by the C.E.S.C. authorities, I am of the view that the ideal solution would be to allow the C.E.S.C. authorities to grant the electricity connection as per report dated January 27, 2020. Any dispute that may be present between the parties cannot militate the fact that the petitioner is in occupation of a premises and has the right to obtain electricity, that is an essential accommodation.
4
7. Under these circumstances, I direct the C.E.S.C. Ltd. to effect electricity connection to the petitioner as per their report dated January 27, 2020 within a period of three weeks from date upon compliance of all formalities. In the event police assistance is required, the C.E.S.C. authorities shall be at liberty to approach the respondent no.7 being the Officer-in-Charge, Pragati Maidan Police Station, herein and the respondent no.7 is directed to provide police help, if required. It is needless to mention, the costs of such police assistance shall be borne by the petitioner.
8. The report filed by the C.E.S.C. authorities is kept with the record.
9. With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of.
10. Since no affidavit-in-opposition is called for, allegations made in the writ petition are deemed not to have been admitted.
11. Urgent certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties on usual undertaking.
(Shekhar B. Saraf, J.)